Disposed¶45

S. Mallesh v. Director of Public Healthand Family Welfare

Service law – reallocation of employees on bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC1 May 2025WP/14248/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Surplus employees; absorption; G.O.Ms.No.78 Finance (HRM.VII) 03.07.2021; G.O.Ms.No.18 Finance (HRM.VII) 12.02.2025; G.O.Ms.No.37 GA(SR) A.P. 31.03.2021; Kamalanathan Committee; Section 77 A.P. Reorganisation Act 2014; Para 14-F Presidential Order; Article 371D; Articles 14 16 21; Telangana; Head Office posting; seniority from initial appointment; fresh representation; six weeks; WP 14248/2025; disposed without merits; no costs

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without going into merits: petitioners directed to make a fresh representation before the respondent authorities, who shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six (06) weeks from receipt of copy of the order; no order as to costs. ¶45

S. Mallesh Vs Director of Public Healthand Family… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondents in declaring the petitioners as surplus employees vide G.O.Ms.No.78, Finance (HRM.VII) Department, dated 03.07.2021, and absorbing them in departments other than the Head Office, is arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 371D of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Without going into the merits of the case, the Court directed the petitioners to make a fresh representation before the respondent authorities, and on such representation being made, the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶44

Key takeaways

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs.ratio¶45
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in the writ petition shall stand closed.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service law — reallocation of employees on bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh — Petitioners, appointed as Junior Assistants/Record Assistants/Office Subordinates in the Head Office of the 1st respondent (Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Telangana), allocated to A.P. by the Kamalanathan Committee under Section 77, A.P. Reorganisation Act, 2014, and relieved vide G.O.Ms. No.37 (GA(SR) Dept., A.P.) dt.31.03.2021 — On return to Telangana, declared surplus and absorbed in district cadre posts vide G.O.Ms.No.78, Finance (HRM.VII) Dept., dt.03.07.2021, while G.O.Ms.No.18 dt.12.02.2025 and a subsequent order gave comparable returnees postings in the Head Office/Secretariat — Writ of Mandamus sought for posting in the 1st respondent's Head Office with seniority from initial appointment, pleading violation of Arts. 14, 16, 21, 371D and the Presidential Order (Para 14-F) — HELD: Without going into merits, petitioners to make a fresh representation; respondents to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within six weeks — Writ petition disposed of, no costs (Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J.).

¶1

[³³⁰⁴ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE^{FIRST DAY OFIMAY} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTYFIVE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

TFIE HONOURABLE SRI^{JUSTICE NAMAVARAPURAJESI'M'ARRAO}

¶6

WRIT PETITION^{NO:14248 0F 2025}

¶7

Between:

¶8

S. Mallesh, S/o^{Late S Arjun, Age} -46^{years, Occ Junior Assistant' PHC'} Nagasamunder,^{Vikarabad District,T S'}

¶9

2.M'RaiaNarendraBabu,S/oLateM.Satyanarayana'Age.44years,occ. Junior'Assistant, DM^{and HO, VikarabadDrstrlctl} 's'

¶10

A. Naqaraiu, S/o. late^{A Subba Raju, Age 50 years' Occ Record Assistant'} Gand6i H<jspital. Hyderabad^District'

¶11

4 T Naoariuna Goud. S/o.^{Late T. AshokGoud,Age35 years' Occ Office} sunorfinhte, DM enb^{Ho, Vikarabad District, T'S'}

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 Director^of Public^{HealthandFamilyWelfare, Stateof Telangana'Sulthan} Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad.

¶15

z state of Telangana,^{Representedb_y its Principalsecretary lo Government,} '-w"rrlr6- oepirrmenr secretariat Buildhge,

¶16

il;;iih; ulolizr^{ina Frriiv} Hyderabad.

¶17

3 State of Telanqana,^{representedby its Principal Secretary to Government} ' Finance Depqrt-ment,^{S6cretariatBuildingsHyderabad'}

¶18

...RESPOIIDENTS

¶19

Petition under^{Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstancesstalgdirltheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to issue a writ, order^{or direction, more particularly one in the natureof a} writofMandamusUnderArlicle226oftheConstitutionoflndiadeclaringthe G'o,MsNo.TSFinqnce(HRM.Vll)Departmentdated03.0T.202lissuedbythe 3rd respondent^{and all otherconsequential proceedingsissued by the 2ndand} 3rd respondents in^so far^{as it relates declaring the petitioners as surplvE} employees and^{absorbingthe petitionersto various departmentsother thanthe} Head office^{is concernedas arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory,malafide, void and}

¶20

without^{jurisdiction, u nco nstitutional' violating Articles 14' 16 and 21 of the} Constitution^{of lndia apart fromcontraryto PresidentialOrder as well as Article} 371D^{otthe Constitutronof lndia and issue consequentialdirections directingthe} lStand2ndRespondentstoforthwithissuepostingorderstothepetitionersln the office^{of the 1st respondentand reckonthe seniority of the petitioners with} effect^{from the date of their initial appointmentin the office of the 1st respondent} and^{consider their cases for further Promotionas per thgir seniority'}

¶21

A NO: 1 oF 2025

¶22

Petition^{under Section 't51 CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated} in^{the affidavit filed in support of the petitigrl'the HighCourt may be pleased tq} direct^{the 191 and 2nd resPondents to forthwith iseue resPectino noltin3..ordel-s to} the^{petitioners ;n l6eofficeof the 1st respondenl6n{ allow the petitionersta} continqe^{in thg officeof the 1st respQndent'pending disposal of the writ petition'}

¶23

Counsel^{for the Petltioner:SRIP'V'KRISHNAIAH}

¶24

Cqunsel^{for the ResPondent No'1 & f: GP EOR $ERVICFS'I}

¶25

Cqunsel^{for the Respo4dent No'3:GP FORSERVIcES-lll}

¶26

The Cgurt^{made the follqwing:ORPER}

¶27

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.14248 of 2o.25

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

.^{The present writ petition is hled by the petitionersunder} Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus declaring G.O.Ms.No.78, Finance (HRM.VII) Department, dated O3.O7.2021 issued by respondent No.3 and all other consequential proceedings issued by respondent Nos.2 and 3, treating the petitioners as surplus employees and allotting them to various departments other than the Head Office, as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14, 16, 2l and 371D of the Constitution of India, and to direct the respondents to forthwith issue posting orders to the petitioners in the office of the lst respondent, reckoning their seniority from the date of their initial appointment.

¶30

Heard Mi. P.V.Krishnaiah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Services-l appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 2 and learned Government Pleader for ServicesIII appearing for respondent No.3 and perused the entire material avaiiable on record.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were appointed as Junior Assistants, Record Assistants,

{

wP,t4248_2025 RRN, J

and Office Subordinates in the Head Office of the lst^respondent, which is a State Cadre Post exempted in terms of Para^{14-F of the} Presidential Order. Upon bifurcation of the erstwhile State^{of Andhra} Pradesh under the A.P. Reorganisation Act, 2Ol4^(hereinafter referred zLs "the Act") and based on the Section 77 ol the^{Act, the} petitioners were allocated to the State of A.P. by the Kamalanathan Committee. It is further submitted that considering the^hardships faced by such employees, who are residing in Telangana^{but posted} in A.P., hoth the Governments of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh mutually decided and agreed to reallocate the employees based on nativity and in pursuance of the same, G.O.Ms. No.37, General Administration (SR) Department, dated 31.O3.2O21, was issued by the A.P.^(iovernment relieving Telangana local employees of Class-lll and Class-lV categories as well as the 13 eligible Class-lV employees who wer,: appointed on compassionate grounds, including the petitioners.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioners came back to State of Telangana from the State of A.P. It is further submitted that their services^{were never terminated} nor treated as surplus employees by the^State of^{A.P. Instead,} the Government of Telangana issued G.O.Ms. No.78 dated 03.O7.2027,

¶37

¶38

treating the^{petitionersas surplus employees and absorbedthem in} various district^{cadre posts, disregarding their cadre and service} history.^{Subsequently, the State ofTelanganahas issued} G.O.Ms.^{No. 18, Pinance (HRM.VII) Department,d'atedl2'O2'2O25'} whereby, the employees,^{who had returned to the State of Telangana} from the State^{of AndhraPradesh,were given postings againstthe} positions, which they^{were occupying prior to their allotment} specifically in the^{Head Office. Furthermore, anotherGovernment} Order was issued,^{wherein such employees were postedin} Secretariat, thereby^{modifyingthe earlierorders' However' the} authorities have acted^{in a discriminatory and arbitrarymannerby} accommodating^{Senior Assistants in theHead Officeand} Secretariat, while^{denying similarconsideration to the petitioners'} who are Junior^{Assistants,RecordAssistants' and Attenders'} despite all^{of them being similarly situated'}

¶39

Learned counsel^{for the petitionerssubmits that the action of} treating the^{petitioners as surplus employeesand denying postingin} the Head Oflice^{disregards their service history and seniority' which} adversely^{affecting futurepromotionsand benefits'It is further} submitted that the action is^{contraryto the PresidentialOrder as} well as contrary to Article^{371D of the Constitutionof India'}

t I

wP_t4248_2025 RRN, J

Therefore, the petitioners approached this Court, for redressal as they have no other alternative remedy, by filing the present writ petition.

¶44

In vieu, of the above submissions made by the both the counsels. without going into merits of the case, the petitioners are directed lo make a fresh representation before the respondent authorities and on such representation being made, the respondent authorities shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶45

7 With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as t() co sts.

¶46

As a sequel, misceilaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶47

¶48

SDi.V, KAVITHA EPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// ,SECTION OFFICER {f 1 The Director of Public Health and Family Welfa rU, State of Telangana, Sulthan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad.

¶49

To,

¶50